Oral Order:

Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard by consent.

2. The petitioner has challenged the Order of the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nasik, dated 1.3.2007, by which that Officer has entertained the review petition and set aside his own earlier Order dated 23.6.2006.

3. By the earlier Order the Education Officer had held the petitioner to be senior to the respondents i.e. Shri Khute and Shri Pawar. By his subsequent Order purportedly in exercise of the powers of review he has held that the petitioner cannot be treated as senior.

4. Mr. Anilkumar Patil the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an Education Officer determines the seniority of teachers in exercise of power under Rule 12 of M.E.P.S. Rules. According to the learned counsel there is no power of review and adjudication of seniority once made. The petitioner has relied on the decision of a learned Single Judge of this Court Lodha, J. (as he then was) in Kausalyabai wd/o. Natthu Paraskar & ors. vs. Ramchandra Satbaji Patekar [1995 (2) Mh.L.J. 913] 913], where this Court observed as follows:

"......It is well settled that the review is the creature of the Statute and quasi judicial authority